From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Shapiro Ornish v. J.J. Holliday

Circuit Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
Jan 7, 1930
37 F.2d 407 (5th Cir. 1930)

Opinion

No. 5557.

January 7, 1930.

Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Northern District of Texas; William H. Atwell, Judge.

Emil Corenbleth, of Dallas, Tex., for appellants.

Robert Allan Ritchie and Fred J. Dudley, both of Dallas, Tex. (Dabney, Goggans Ritchie, of Dallas, Tex., on the brief), for appellees.

Before WALKER, BRYAN, and FOSTER, Circuit Judges.


This is an appeal from a judgment denying a discharge in bankruptcy to appellants on the ground that they had failed to explain satisfactorily losses of assets and the deficiency of assets to meet their liabilities at the time of adjudication as bankrupts. Section 14b(7) Bankruptcy Act as amended by the Act of May 27, 1926 (11 USCA § 32).

This case presents purely a question of fact. The District Court in 37 F.2d 403 reviewed the material facts and reached the conclusion that a discharge should be withheld. It would serve no good purpose to again review the facts. It is enough to say that the record supports the conclusion reached by the District Court.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Shapiro Ornish v. J.J. Holliday

Circuit Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
Jan 7, 1930
37 F.2d 407 (5th Cir. 1930)
Case details for

Shapiro Ornish v. J.J. Holliday

Case Details

Full title:SHAPIRO ORNISH, a Partnership, and Julius Shapiro and Louis Ornish…

Court:Circuit Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit

Date published: Jan 7, 1930

Citations

37 F.2d 407 (5th Cir. 1930)

Citing Cases

Johnson-Clayton v. Ferebee (In re Ferebee)

To be satisfactory, "an explanation" must convince the judge and must not consist of vague and indefinite…

In re Haimes

"The question of whether a debtor satisfactorily explains a loss of assets is a question of fact." In re…